A doctor's view of Obama care

In one sentence, this doctor running for office in Illinois has summed up in one sentence the Obamacare ACA. She says,

"“We are going to be gifted with a health care plan that we are forced to purchase, and fined if we don’t,” Bellar continues, “signed by a president who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, by a government which has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare, all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that’s broke.”

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for
following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and
comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are
automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some
comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules,
click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

Obamacare doesn't guarantee everyone will have insurance though RH. People can game the system by holding off on purchasing insurance, paying the tax instead, and then getting insurance if they become "really sick" because insurance companies are now forced to insure people with pre-existing conditions.
All that will do is increase everyone's premiums and make it even LESS affordable.

You don't think there are people now who voluntarily go without health insurance? Who do you think picks up the tab when they cannot afford their medical bills? Premiums have always been increasing and becoming less affordable all along.

You stated that those not buying insurance are a burden on the rest of us who are paying premiums . Not true. IF someone without insurance gets treatment, they have to pay the bill out of pocket or arrange financing. In some cases, bankruptcy may be the only option.

The only ones that get taxpayer funded treatment are the poor or disabled that qualify for Medicaid. A middle class or wealthy person does not qualify for Medicaid.

As for insurance premiums, they are directly related to medical costs and medical cost have been increasing. One reason is the increasing cost of malpractice insurance. And the malpractice insurance is increasing because of the number of patients hiring lawyers. The malpractice lawsuit lawyers are getting rich.

Another reason for the increasing costs are the myriad of tests available now to help diagnose ailments. Fifty years ago, doctors has fewer tests and had to do educated guesses at times and some were made in error.

It's similar to the auto repair business, where a mechanic used to use unusual sounds and visual clues like the color of smoke emitted at the exhaust to diagnose problems. While some mechanics still may use those techniques, the computers on board each car now have error codes and the mechanic can plug in a device to read those error codes. Those machines cost money and of course we pay for the computer in the car when we buy it.

RH- Where did I say that there weren't people with insurance today? Of course there are. I was simply pointing out that Obamacare isn't the cure-all for our ills and that everyone would be covered because of it.

To add to herons points above, Obamacare also raises taxes - LOTS OF THEM - including raising taxes on medical devices and the companies who make them. When it costs more to do business, who do you think pays for that?
The consumer (ie: the patient).

I am all for people taking more responsibility, but when our federal government decides to take over health care and then FORCE people to buy a product, then that's where I draw the line.
If you want more people to buy insurance, then you do it with market changes. You figure out why medical costs are going up and try and fix that. You figure out better/more ways to get insurance companies to compete for your business, which will lower cost.
You don't do it by hiring thousands of IRS agents and threaten the American people by demanding they purchase a product, and if they don't they will be fined/taxed.

What they "say" and what they end up doing (especially in the future) will be 2 different things heron. It's how liberals operate.
While they are "saying" they won't focus (yet) on people with no insurance, they have also stated that they will withhold refunds from people to pay the fine/tax. That takes manpower to do that, and if taking money out of people's refund check isn't "focusing", then I don't know what is.
From what I've read over the past few months, they have already added quite a few new IRS agents and there are reports that they have to hire roughly 16,000 more to "enforce" Obamacare.
Hey, at least Obama and his Chicago partner in crime (Valerie Jarrett) were up front and honest with us at the very beginning. Jarrett said they will be "ready to RULE from day-1".
She wasn't kidding.

No doubt computers will do a lot of the job, but as you say, data needs to be plugged into those PC's for them to work. With 310 million people (probably closer to 340 million with illegals) living in this country, that's a lot of data to record.
Plus, when you take into consideration that roughly 50% of the workers in this country pay no federal income taxes, doing a simple deduction / withholding from their tax returns (to pay the fine/tax) won't be possible. So in the future, if they want to collect their fine/tax money from these folks they will eventually be forced to go after them in some way.
That could get ugly.

This is NOT what our federal government should be doing with it's time, money, and resources.
Hopefully, if Romney gets elected, it won't be.

Agree and the naive part is that many workers are paid in cash and don't file, so there will be no record and no taxes and no refunds. So how will they get those people to buy insurance or fine them for not having it?

My view is that using driver's licenses to cross check would include more people since even illegals seem to get a drivers license and that would include those paid in cash as well. If you have a driver's license, you need health insurance. That is if the ACA is not repealed.

Comments are welcome, so long as they are civil. A Facebook account is required. Abuse may result in the commenter being permanently blocked. Personal attacks are strictly prohibited. We reserve the right to remove any comments at any time.